\section{Experimental evaluation MGC vs M\&S}
\begin{frame}{Setup}
\begin{itemize}
    \item MGC was implemented in Moonwalker in three man-monhts. \pause
	\item Moonwalker was benchmarked using two multithreaded programs in the Java Grande Forum Benchmark suite. \pause
	\item Both programs where automatically converted from JAVA to C\#. \pause
	\item Both programs take two configuration arguments; \emph{t} for the number of threads and \emph{d} for the datasize. \pause
	\item Both arguments regulate the size of the state space.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{Setup}
\begin{itemize}
	\item (1) \emph{Moldyn} is a Molecular Dynamics Simulation where \emph{d} is the amount of particles. \pause
	\item (2) \emph{Raytracer} is a 3D ray tracer (e.g. drawing a shadow of a particular shape) where \emph{d} is the number of pixels.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{MolDyn results}
\begin{itemize}
	\item In configuration 2-1 MGC did 5863 states/sec and M\&S did 5560 states/sec.
	\item Only in cases where Moonwalker ran out of memory M\&S is faster. So this is rather inconclusive.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{Raytracer results}
\begin{itemize}
	\item In configuration 3-1 MGC did 3278 states/sec and M\&S did 1842 states/sec.
	\item In all cases MGC is faster.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{Results}
\begin{itemize}
    \item Performance increase (states/sec) in almost all configurations! \pause
	\item In both programs found an assertion violation due to a datarace. \pause
	\item This datarace was also present in de JAVA implementation supplied by the JGF suite. \pause
	\item These dataraces were \emph{not} explicitly modeled!
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}


